Re: ahci questions
frantisek holop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: my last question for people running ahci, is it better than ide in any perceivable way? The code is so much cleaner than the pciide mess. That's enough to make it better. I also believe it's faster, but I don't have any concrete numbers for it. Also, it's cool to have sd0 on a laptop. //art
Re: ahci questions
Artur Grabowski wrote: frantisek holop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: my last question for people running ahci, is it better than ide in any perceivable way? The code is so much cleaner than the pciide mess. That's enough to make it better. I also believe it's faster, but I don't have any concrete numbers for it. Also, it's cool to have sd0 on a laptop. Heh. I'm so used to almost every disk nowadays attaching as sd (sata, usb, raid stuff) so I get both nostalgic and a bit uncomfortable when disks (mainly CF's) show up as wd0. Kinda floppy disk feeling. :-) /Alexander
Re: ahci questions
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008, David Gwynne wrote: On 08/12/2008, at 8:36 PM, Alexander Hall wrote: Heh. I'm so used to almost every disk nowadays attaching as sd (sata, usb, raid stuff) so I get both nostalgic and a bit uncomfortable when disks (mainly CF's) show up as wd0. Kinda floppy disk feeling. :-) heh. one day everything that talks ata (including cf cards and old wdc stuff) should all sit under atascsi and appear as sd(4). i would love it if someone could spend the time reworking the code to make it happen. Are the ATA features, normally accessible with atactl(8), supported in any way for SATA disks appearing as sd(4) disks? I do not know if smartctl from ports work for them, too. I have only SCSI, ATA and USB disks currently. Regards, David
Re: ahci questions
On 08/12/2008, at 21:33, David Vasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 8 Dec 2008, David Gwynne wrote: On 08/12/2008, at 8:36 PM, Alexander Hall wrote: Heh. I'm so used to almost every disk nowadays attaching as sd (sata, usb, raid stuff) so I get both nostalgic and a bit uncomfortable when disks (mainly CF's) show up as wd0. Kinda floppy disk feeling. :-) heh. one day everything that talks ata (including cf cards and old wdc stuff) should all sit under atascsi and appear as sd(4). i would love it if someone could spend the time reworking the code to make it happen. Are the ATA features, normally accessible with atactl(8), supported in any way for SATA disks appearing as sd(4) disks? I do not know if smartctl from ports work for them, too. Atactl works fine on sd disks behind atascsi. It's actually less code than the same functionality on wd. I don't know about smartctl, but it shouldn't be hard to support. I have only SCSI, ATA and USB disks currently. There isn't much else out there. Pretty much everything talks SCSI or ata now. Regards, David
ahci questions
hi there, i was looking for some ahci info when i stumbled upon the intel site http://www.intel.com/technology/serialata/ahci.htm Implementation of the Advanced Host Controller Interface Specification requires a license from Intel. does this mean based on their specs, or _any_ ahci implementation? also the specs are free to download (unlike SD specs IIRC).. ahci(4) says the driver emulates SCSI so i guess it is not based on these specs. but it doesn't mention if it supports the ahci features that are supposed to be better than ide, e.g. hotswapping and power management -- so i guess it doesn't... my last question for people running ahci, is it better than ide in any perceivable way? thanks, -f -- oxymoron: mobil station.
Re: ahci questions
frantisek holop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Implementation of the Advanced Host Controller Interface Specification requires a license from Intel. If you build a chipset with an AHCI interface, you need a license. Chip design is outside the purview of OpenBSD, I think. my last question for people running ahci, is it better than ide in any perceivable way? Why, yes. It means we can use the same code to support any chipset in AHCI mode. The alternative is to write special code for each chip to support its very own legacy mode--the mess that is pciide(4). Or fall back to a 1986-style common IDE interface without DMA etc. -- Christian naddy Weisgerber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ahci questions
it's 10 times faster than ide , go for it. also get the right hard drives, those must be sata2 On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 02:47:23PM +0100, frantisek holop wrote: hi there, i was looking for some ahci info when i stumbled upon the intel site http://www.intel.com/technology/serialata/ahci.htm Implementation of the Advanced Host Controller Interface Specification requires a license from Intel. does this mean based on their specs, or _any_ ahci implementation? also the specs are free to download (unlike SD specs IIRC).. ahci(4) says the driver emulates SCSI so i guess it is not based on these specs. but it doesn't mention if it supports the ahci features that are supposed to be better than ide, e.g. hotswapping and power management -- so i guess it doesn't... my last question for people running ahci, is it better than ide in any perceivable way? thanks, -f -- oxymoron: mobil station.
Re: ahci questions
hmm, on Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 01:56:16PM -0200, Marcos Laufer - Ipv4networks.com said that it's 10 times faster than ide , go for it. also get the right hard drives, those must be sata2 so no real benefit for sata disks? how can i say if a disk is sata or sata2? sata is SATA 150 and sata2 is SATA 300? -f -- light doesn't emit energy; it emits little dark eaters
